142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10783926)
1. Preferred listening levels of children who use hearing aids: comparison to prescriptive targets.
Scollie SD; Seewald RC; Moodie KS; Dekok K
J Am Acad Audiol; 2000 Apr; 11(4):230-8. PubMed ID: 10783926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility.
Ching TY; Quar TK; Johnson EE; Newall P; Sharma M
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):260-74. PubMed ID: 25751694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of real-world preferences and performance of hearing aids fitted according to the NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 procedures in children with moderately severe to profound hearing loss.
Quar TK; Ching TY; Newall P; Sharma M
Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):322-32. PubMed ID: 23570290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.
Johnson EE; Dillon H
J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.
Keidser G; Grant F
Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):501-15. PubMed ID: 11770672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures.
Byrne D; Dillon H; Ching T; Katsch R; Keidser G
J Am Acad Audiol; 2001 Jan; 12(1):37-51. PubMed ID: 11214977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An initial-fit comparison of two generic hearing aid prescriptive methods (NAL-NL2 and CAM2) to individuals having mild to moderately severe high-frequency hearing loss.
Johnson EE
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Feb; 24(2):138-50. PubMed ID: 23357807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cortical auditory-evoked potentials (CAEPs) in adults in response to filtered speech stimuli.
Carter L; Dillon H; Seymour J; Seeto M; Van Dun B
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):807-22. PubMed ID: 24224988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Effects of Manufacturer's Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss.
Quar TK; Umat C; Chew YY
J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 May; 30(5):346-356. PubMed ID: 30461383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of frequency response and aided speech-recognition performance for hearing aids selected by three different prescriptive methods.
Humes L; Hackett T
J Am Acad Audiol; 1990 Apr; 1(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 2132584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids.
Stelmachowicz PG; Dalzell S; Peterson D; Kopun J; Lewis DL; Hoover BE
Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 9562535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An examination of the practicality of the simplex procedure.
Preminger JE; Neuman AC; Bakke MH; Walters D; Levitt H
Ear Hear; 2000 Jun; 21(3):177-93. PubMed ID: 10890726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The preferred number of channels (one, two, or four) in NAL-NL1 prescribed wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) devices.
Keidser G; Grant F
Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):516-27. PubMed ID: 11770673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using trainable hearing aids to examine real-world preferred gain.
Mueller HG; Hornsby BW; Weber JE
J Am Acad Audiol; 2008; 19(10):758-73. PubMed ID: 19358456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. User preference and reliability of bilateral hearing aid gain adjustments.
Hornsby BW; Mueller HG
J Am Acad Audiol; 2008 Feb; 19(2):158-70. PubMed ID: 18669129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A cross-over, double-blind comparison of the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v4.1 prescriptions for children with mild to moderately severe hearing loss.
Ching TY; Scollie SD; Dillon H; Seewald R
Int J Audiol; 2010 Jan; 49 Suppl 1():S4-15. PubMed ID: 20109088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bone-Anchored Hearing Aids Fitted According to NAL and DSL Procedures in Adults with Mixed Hearing Loss.
Bruschini L; Canelli R; Guida M; Pardini P; Giuntini G; Fiacchini G; Berrettini S; Lazzerini F; Forlì F
J Int Adv Otol; 2022 Jul; 18(4):302-307. PubMed ID: 35894526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Investigation of hearing aid fitting according to the national acoustic laboratories' prescription for non-linear hearing aids and the desired sensation level methods in Japanese speakers: a crossover-controlled trial.
Furuki S; Sano H; Kurioka T; Nitta Y; Umehara S; Hara Y; Yamashita T
Auris Nasus Larynx; 2023 Oct; 50(5):708-713. PubMed ID: 36792399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Hearing aid fitting and developmental outcomes of children fit according to either the NAL or DSL prescription: fit-to-target, audibility, speech and language abilities.
Ching TYC; Zhang VW; Johnson EE; Van Buynder P; Hou S; Burns L; Button L; Flynn C; McGhie K
Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(sup2):S41-S54. PubMed ID: 28971727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Is normal or less than normal overall loudness preferred by first-time hearing aid users?
Smeds K
Ear Hear; 2004 Apr; 25(2):159-72. PubMed ID: 15064661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
